The Congressional Budget Office estimated Friday that the U.S. federal budget deficit for fiscal year 2007, which ended Sunday, was about $161 billion, or 1.2% of gross domestic product.
“While somewhat lower than estimates issued at the beginning of the year, the 2007 deficit announced today by the Congressional Budget Office is no cause for celebration,” said House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D., S.C.)

FY-2009 Deficit – $1.85 Trillion.

When will the corrupt-ocrats and their minions take responsibility? After they print another $150 billion for porkulus II?

The honorable thing would be to fall on their swords.

]]>By: nelsonknowshttp://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/08/wapo-repeats-inherited-deficit-fallacy/comment-page-2/#comment-3028037
Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:01:51 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=74814#comment-3028037Reid; “I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.”
OOPS, sorry Dingy Harry, your B.S. doesn’t wash.
]]>By: bluegrasshttp://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/08/wapo-repeats-inherited-deficit-fallacy/comment-page-2/#comment-3027925
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:35:50 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=74814#comment-3027925Its about time bush steps up to defend himself and put this lying joker in his right place.
]]>By: bayamhttp://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/08/wapo-repeats-inherited-deficit-fallacy/comment-page-2/#comment-3027763
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:57:15 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=74814#comment-3027763Come on Ed, you know better. You’re not showing fully accurate stats as your realize that the deficit grew drastically under Bush. Stimulating artificial economic growth with deficit-based tax cuts is an old parlor trick that never ends well. And it should be more than obvious by now that the economy of 2005 thru 2008 was running on the vapors of a housing bubble- which wasn’t Bush’ fault by the way- but an unfortunate fact. Those lower deficit numbers in 2005-07 were never sustainable and most economists said so at the time (the major reason why Greenspan opposed Bush’s second round of huge tax cuts in 2004 was the effect on the deficit).

Bush inherited a budget surplus from Clinton, and by combining tax cuts with massive spending increases, created a massive, structural budget deficit. Under Bush, conservatives lost their way. When Treasury Secretary Paul O’neill, a former Fortune 500 CEO, objected to additional tax cuts for the wealthy that inflated an already large deficit, the entire Republican Party turned on him. At that time, “deficits don’t matter” was the official policy.

Now you’re trying to revise history. Instead of pointing to the Bush “economic miracle” as an excuse for Bush’s irresponsible spending and reckless tax cuts, you’re trying to say that Bush didn’t really increase federal spending or pass deficit-funded tax cuts. It’s amazing the difference a couple years can make.

Let’s consider the past record. Between 2001 and 2007, Bush and his allies in Congress increased the US annual budget from $2 trillion to $2.7 trillion, an increase of about 35% over a period of 6 years. At the same time, Bush passed a number of tax cuts that were never offset by spending cuts, effectively pumping cash into the economy to generate artificial growth. With the tax base lowered, the country was guaranteed a crash landing when the economy and stock markets collapsed. To make his legacy more complete, Bush nearly doubled the federal debt, adding a whopping $4 trillion to the China tab.

You can blame Obama for spending increases, that’s certainly true. But the fact remains that Obama inherited the results of 8 years of defective fiscal policy, unbalanced books, and slick accounting tricks that excluded the costs of war from annual budget outlays.

A report commissioned in 2002 by O’Neill, while he was Treasury Secretary, suggested the United States faced future federal budget deficits of more than US$ 500 billion. The report also suggested that sharp tax increases, massive spending cuts, or both would be unavoidable if the United States were to meet benefit promises to its future generations. The study estimated that closing the budget gap would require the equivalent of an immediate and permanent 66 percent across-the-board income tax increase.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_O'Neill_(businessman)

The democRATS took over the House in 2006–they write spending bills. All the president can do is sign them or veto them after the Senate passes them.

Do you know that’s not what actually occurred? During the years when Bush submitted budgets with Republicans in control of the Congress, the annual budget increased from $2 trillion to $2.7 trillion. In every case, his budgets excluded wartime spending, which amounted to hundreds of billions in additional outlays that were excluded from the budget.

Do the math- an increase from $2 tril to about $2.8 tril (when you include war costs) amounts to a 40% increase in federal spending. And this occurred with big cuts to the EPA and no significant investments in infrastructure. Quite an amazing feat.

Obama does not know what he is doing, and the staff he has assembled around him is equally lost. At first I wondered if pity was appropriate, but as I thought about it, it becomes clear that we are in grave danger. At best, Obama is losing touch with reality. At worst Obama is going to lie to people until he is finally removed from office.

The delusional statements Obama made were just stunning in their conflict. First Obama claimed his massive stimulus spending had saved the country, then he claimed that no deficit was caused by this spending. No reasonable person can expect these statements to go unquestioned for long.

As Obama continued to ramble on in a campaign like mode, it became clear that he is losing touch with reality. I do not recall ever seeing Obama have such strange mannerisms. It was almost as if he was wishing that the speach would just end with some grand applause and a miracle would occur to solve his problems.

I wonder if we have ever had a president declared ‘incapable of doing his job’ and removed from office before? Seems like this may have ‘unofficially’ happened once before with the VP stepping in very quietly. I doubt that with all the media exposure in todays world that it can be done as quietly.

]]>By: Terryehttp://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/08/wapo-repeats-inherited-deficit-fallacy/comment-page-1/#comment-3027542
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:44:57 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=74814#comment-3027542Obama was at the Brookings Institute today whining about how Republicans created the problem and then dumped it on him and now won’t help him fix it. I swear to God, this man is the biggest cry baby weenie we have ever had as President.
]]>By: Dark-Starhttp://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/08/wapo-repeats-inherited-deficit-fallacy/comment-page-1/#comment-3027541
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:44:07 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=74814#comment-3027541

Dark-Star on December 8, 2009 at 3:01 PM

Never, lib. You know that.

In the year 2525, you’ll still be blaming Bush.

Liam on December 8, 2009 at 3:03 PM

So much for an honest question.

When did I blame Bush, wingnut? I’m well aware Obummer has outspent the almighty GW by a long shot…I just wonder how long it will be before his starry-eyed suckers realize the same.

]]>By: Terryehttp://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/08/wapo-repeats-inherited-deficit-fallacy/comment-page-1/#comment-3027532
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:41:43 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=74814#comment-3027532I can remember when Bush vetoed that big fat farm bill and the Democrats over rode the veto and said he was stingy.

Honestly, these people have no shame. When Bush cut taxes, revenues increased. April 2006, was the biggest pay day the Federal government had ever seen.

The deficit was less than $200 billion when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took control of the Congress.

But back to the civics lesson. Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party. They controlled the budget process for FY2008 and FY2009, as well as FY2010 and FY2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For FY2009, though, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the FY2009 budgets.

–The President first issues a budget request, which he prepares with the help of the CBO, to Congress. Then Congress passes a budget. And FY09 started in October of 2008.

and the tax cuts contributing to a structural deficit, not to mention that recession thing that Barney Frank caused, with ACORN.

I’m juts taking a more practical approach.

Bleeds Blue on December 8, 2009 at 3:23 PM

What part of RECORD TAX REVENUE’s FOR 2008 do you not understand? This was entirely due to tax cuts, you can’t blame RECORD SPENDING by Obowma on tax cuts. When this administration, the most opaque in history, spent MORE THAN ALL PAST PRESIDENT’s COMBINED in 10 months,

By definition, you can’t inherit a deficit. Obama could complain about the national debt, but since his primary complaint is that Bush didn’t piss enough money away, he doesn’t have much room there either.

Well, that’s not exactly true, Dr. Burman. We could start cutting the size and cost of the federal government instead of expanding it. We could then use the money we save to start paying off some of our debt, as well as use the increased revenues from better economic performance that would result.

Sooooo, if I don’t have money to spend, I shouldn’t spend it? That sounds just like anyones personal financing. I thought the idea, as Joe Biden said was to spend your way out of debt? Keynes was an idiot too.

]]>By: rocketmanhttp://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/08/wapo-repeats-inherited-deficit-fallacy/comment-page-1/#comment-3027403
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:07:18 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=74814#comment-3027403***
The democRATS took over the House in 2006–they write spending bills. All the president can do is sign them or veto them after the Senate passes them.
***
Anyway–don’t confuse anyone with economic or Constitutional facts. IT’S ALL BOOOOOOSH’S FAULT!
***
John Bibb
***
]]>By: Schadenfreudehttp://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/08/wapo-repeats-inherited-deficit-fallacy/comment-page-1/#comment-3027378
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 20:56:56 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=74814#comment-3027378

fraudulent way in which the Democrats handled the FY 2009 budget and ended up getting another $470 billion of DEFICIT spending rammed through in an omnibus bill should have had the media frothing at the mouth!!

I defy Bleeds Blue or any other troll to defend this.

rockmom on December 8, 2009 at 2:48 PM

They can’t be “frothing at the mouth” when they are busy in Obama’s trousers.

And that, you should be willing to admit, is not how Bambi is presenting the facts, nor is the MSM. For them, the budget is all Booosssshhhh’s fault and they just inherited the deficit rather than being accomplices in its creation.

PackerBronco on December 8, 2009 at 3:16 PM

President Obama has got some good points too, with the Medicaid drug spending and the tax cuts contributing to a structural deficit, not to mention that recession thing that Barney Frank caused, with ACORN.

I’m juts taking a more practical approach.

No you won’t. By your own posts, you agree. All you’ll do is try to make it sound better.

Liam on December 8, 2009 at 3:17 PM

Man, you are like a Gila monster…once you get your teeth in you don’t let go.

…would be that the 2009-10 budgets were responses to a unique and challenging economic situation and people did what they had to do. Beyond 2010, it is indeed wholly owned…

Bleeds Blue on December 8, 2009 at 3:11 PM

But projected budget deficits in FY 2011 are still twice as much as FY2008 (the last one Bush signed). If the economy is in growth mode as fully expected by the Obama administration, why is this deficit sooooo huge? What is our money being spent on? The deficits cannot be from the Bush tax cuts, they expire Dec 31, 2010 (if not earlier if the Dems do something).

Bleeds Blue: My argument — which I know you won’t agree with so we needn’t start it — would be that the 2009-10 budgets were responses to a unique and challenging economic situation and people did what they had to do. Beyond 2010, it is indeed wholly owned (although you guys are going to take back the House in ‘10, right?)

The fact of the matter, though is that the 2009-2010 budgets did not address the “unique and challenging economic situation.” The bulk of the appropriations were made up of leftover wish-list items of the Dem Left, items that did/do nothing to “address the unique and challenging economic situation.” These items, which bloated the budgets, were simply political payback to special interests.